News on British health and life expectancy

Sponsored Links
What I don't get is how those on the lowest incomes can spend 1/3rd of their money on cigarettes. My guess is they aren't paying £10.80 for a pack of 20. Even so, getting the least well off, to give up would make a huge difference to their life and wealth.

The proportion of smokers was higher among those with lower incomes: 29% of adults in the lowest income quintile were current smokers, almost three times as many as in the highest income quintile where 10% were current smokers.
Click to expand...


smoking-income-edit.jpg


source http://healthsurvey.hscic.gov.uk/da...visualisation/explore-the-trends/smoking.aspx


The proportion of smokers was higher among those with lower incomes: 29% of adults in the lowest income quintile were current smokers, almost three times as many as in the highest income quintile where 10% were current smokers.
Click to expand...
 
Sponsored Links
motorbiking said:
y guess is they aren't paying £10.80 for a pack of 20. Even so, getting the least well off, to give up would make a huge difference to their life and wealth
Click to expand...

People living in poverty are more likely to have addictions.

I would suggest properly funded social care services and proper distribution of wealth would make a big difference to their lives.

And how would you feel if you had list your job due to illness only to be told your universal credit payment wont get paid for 6 weeks.
 
Does poverty cause some people to lead certain lifestyles or is their poverty caused by the lifestyle they lead.
Research would indicate that poverty is caused by the former rather than the latter.
 
Ihavenojob said:
I've heard it all now, who is to blame for global warming (or climate change as they prefer to call it now),Tory or Labour government?
Click to expand...

What do you mean? Are you suggesting that one is, and the other is not? Or do you really think that no governments are to blame for ignoring 30 years of warnings?
 
Ihavenojob said:
How could any UK government be responsible for GLOBAL warming (as you said)?
Click to expand...

I wasn't singling out the UK government, but making the point that government is responsible for policy that directly affects industry, power supply and the subsequent environmental impact of those decisions. Environment scientists have been warning about this for decades now - when I was studying it a university in the early 90s we already knew that we had to massively reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.

What our government, or parliament if you wish, has failed is flood mitigation - another topic I studied almost 30 years ago. The UK's drainage systems have been built up over hundreds of years and every thing was working well and in good balance, but recent governments (I am not interested in playing the blame game so don't ask me which) have stopped investing in drainage maintenance, have endorsed change of land with more woodland lost, have approved building on flood plains etc. To suggest that it is not their fault is rather short-sighted.

Even if global warming is natural (which is isn't) then we still need to prepare for it, and our governments have completely failed to do anything. Much of the UK was uninhabitable for much of the year in the past - e.g. Somerset's name derives from the fact that it attracted summer settlers - it would be flooded for half the year. Many settlements have grown because of the work done in the past to build flood defences, river barriers, and drainage systems. But all this is being left to rot now.

It's a bit like all these damp problems people have on this forum. A house that was once high and dry, gets altered, with raised paths and patios, has drainage channels blocked due to lack of maintenance, has natural soakaways replaced with impermeable driveways and patios, and then they wonder why 50 years after it was built it becomes damp, mouldy and uninhabitable.

In short - people are to blame. People need to fix it.
 
jonbey said:
What our government, or parliament if you wish, has failed is flood mitigation
Click to expand...
That's another thing that gets my goat. Building on floodplains and flood alleviation has caused more damage than most things.I read that 10% (or about) of new homes built in the last decade or so have been built on floodplains, the flood alleviation in flood prone areas just pushes the water to another area, usually a floodplain, but there are now houses there, so more schemes to move the water on to someone else. They are still building near rivers, and these houses aren't going to be affordable on prime riverside sites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links

Similar threads

JohnD
Jeremy the Hunt... mental health
Replies
2
Views
658
durhamplumber
D
JohnD
Jeremy (C) Hunt picks the wrong battle
13 14 15
Replies
220
Views
15K
Corgigrouch GTi
C
securespark
Jeremy Hunt
Replies
10
Views
838
joe-90
joe-90
JohnD
Hunt the Budget
6 7 8
Replies
115
Views
2K
JohnD
JohnD
JohnD
Channel 4's Dispatches : Are Conservatives Racist?
Replies
2
Views
479
Thomasthepiperson
T
Back
Top